eshrag
05-09-2011, 10:12 AM
http://hits.guardian.co.uk/b/ss/guardiangu-feeds/1/H.22.2/93840?ns=guardian&pageName=No+one%27s+sure+what+Twitter+or+the+royal +family+are+for+%7C+Ask+Hadley%3AArticle%3A1554842&ch=Life+and+style&c3=Guardian&c4=Fashion%2CLife+and+style%2CKate+Middleton%2CTwi tter+%28Technology%29%2CMedia%2CInternet%2CBloggin g+%28Media%29%2CTechnology&c5=Fashion+and+Beauty%2CDigital+Media%2CNot+commer cially+useful%2CMedia+Weekly%2CTechnology+Gadgets% 2CCorporate+IT&c6=Hadley+Freeman&c7=11-May-09&c8=1554842&c9=Article&c10=Feature&c11=Life+and+style&c13=Ask+Hadley+%28series%29&c25=&c30=content&h2=GU%2FLife+and+style%2FFashion
But that shouldn't stop us discussing Kate's wardrobe (in 140 characters or less)
I have recently been lured in by the siren call of Twitter. How do I choose my photo for it? And is it acceptable to change my photo occasionally?
Brian, London
"The siren call", you say, Brian? To those of us who have, amazingly, managed to resist the temptation to share our every passing thought about what's happening on the telly with thousands of "followers", and be bombarded by the thoughts of thousands of others doing the same, it is indeed a siren call, albeit not a Greek temptress siren but a screeching ambulance one that makes me want to put my hands over my ears and run in the opposite direction.
Well, de gustibus non est disputandum, as I never say (because my taste is always right and everyone who disagrees is wrong): if you're determined to be a twit, then I cannot stop you. But you raise an interesting point with the photo and you're quite right that it is a tricky decision, mainly because no one seems certain what Twitter is for: is it a means of spreading news? Encouraging political revolution? Telling the world what you think about the death of Osama bin Laden? Ascertaining what Paris Hilton thinks about the death of Osama bin Laden? Self-promotion? One-liners about Kate Middleton's wedding dress? Starting feuds with other people in your industry purely for procrastination purposes?
Yes, yes, and five more times, yes. But the myriad of purposes requires not just a careful calibration of tones, but a very special photo. After all, a photo that suits, say, a disquisition on the naffness of Eurovision does not, perhaps, work so well when one is proclaiming the generation-changing nature of Bin Laden's death (in 140 characters or less.) And no, you cannot hide behind what I guess is called the Twitter egg: that merely looks like you can't be bothered and don't care about the needs, expectations and entertainment of your followers. So somehow, you must find the perfect photo that suits all moods and proclamations.
As if that wasn't pressure enough, you'd better make sure that when you do choose a picture that it is the perfect one because you cannot change it. A change of photo suggests vanity and a deliberate attempt to change one's image that is somehow forgivable on Facebook but not on Twitter. Twitter, you see, is supposed to be above such things, as you'd expect of a medium used to start revolutions (and express opinions on Kate Middleton's dress).
So you need to find the perfect photo, one that expresses wit, solemnity, intelligence, thunderous anger and awe-inspiring insider knowledge; a mash-up, if you will, of Christopher Hitchens, Paul Krugman, Stephen Colbert, David Remnick and Dorothy Parker, but also one that makes you look, you know, young and hot. And if you're finding this stressful, wait until you realise that your devastatingly witty observation about David Cameron's face hasn't been retweeted once. Really, isn't life hard enough?
So we've all seen the wedding dress. Do we still have to care about how Kate Middleton dresses?
Sarah, by email
Oh my stars, yes. Now more than ever! But as with the Twitter, no one quite seems to know why because no one knows what the royal family is for (and, one might add, were one feeling particularly sarcastic, perhaps this in turn suggests that the confusion comes from the fact that the royal family and Twitter alike are not for anything at all. But let's not start the week on the grumpy note we know it will end on).
Even before Cinderella married Prince Charming, one writer hilariously came over all Dowager Countess of Grantham, despite writing for the most downmarket tabloid ever produced and she huffed and puffed like the big bad wolf over Kate's shocking gumption in buying clothes from the – gasp – high street! "Staggeringly normal, mind-bogglingly cheap and disappointingly pedestrian," sniffed the scribe, which is funny because that middle term is just what some of us think of the jibes thrown by this tabloid at la Middleton.
And yet, insanely, Kate, somehow failed to follow this writer's advice and continued to wear high-street clothes even after the wedding, prompting one American fashion blog to headline the photo, "Kate Middleton Steps Out in an $89 Polyester Zara Dress the Day After the Wedding." The story itself was (sort of) positive, the superfluous reference to polyester was not. And so, in order to help the duchess, I have the perfect outfit that she should wear to satisfy one and all of her subjects: a Disney princess costume, which is just how princesses are supposed to dress. They appear to be only £20, true, but only Kate gets to have all of her dreams come true.
Fashion (http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/fashion)
Kate Middleton (http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/kate-middleton)
Twitter (http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/twitter)
Internet (http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/internet)
Blogging (http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/blogging)
Hadley Freeman (http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/hadleyfreeman)
guardian.co.uk (http://www.guardian.co.uk) © Guardian News & Media Limited 2011 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions (http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html) | More Feeds (http://www.guardian.co.uk/help/feeds)
http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/kmhfMS3QVk1ISlcJ9njvU_-qt1k/0/di (http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/kmhfMS3QVk1ISlcJ9njvU_-qt1k/0/da)
http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/kmhfMS3QVk1ISlcJ9njvU_-qt1k/1/di (http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/kmhfMS3QVk1ISlcJ9njvU_-qt1k/1/da)
أكثر... (http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2011/may/08/ask-hadley-middleton-royals-twitter)
But that shouldn't stop us discussing Kate's wardrobe (in 140 characters or less)
I have recently been lured in by the siren call of Twitter. How do I choose my photo for it? And is it acceptable to change my photo occasionally?
Brian, London
"The siren call", you say, Brian? To those of us who have, amazingly, managed to resist the temptation to share our every passing thought about what's happening on the telly with thousands of "followers", and be bombarded by the thoughts of thousands of others doing the same, it is indeed a siren call, albeit not a Greek temptress siren but a screeching ambulance one that makes me want to put my hands over my ears and run in the opposite direction.
Well, de gustibus non est disputandum, as I never say (because my taste is always right and everyone who disagrees is wrong): if you're determined to be a twit, then I cannot stop you. But you raise an interesting point with the photo and you're quite right that it is a tricky decision, mainly because no one seems certain what Twitter is for: is it a means of spreading news? Encouraging political revolution? Telling the world what you think about the death of Osama bin Laden? Ascertaining what Paris Hilton thinks about the death of Osama bin Laden? Self-promotion? One-liners about Kate Middleton's wedding dress? Starting feuds with other people in your industry purely for procrastination purposes?
Yes, yes, and five more times, yes. But the myriad of purposes requires not just a careful calibration of tones, but a very special photo. After all, a photo that suits, say, a disquisition on the naffness of Eurovision does not, perhaps, work so well when one is proclaiming the generation-changing nature of Bin Laden's death (in 140 characters or less.) And no, you cannot hide behind what I guess is called the Twitter egg: that merely looks like you can't be bothered and don't care about the needs, expectations and entertainment of your followers. So somehow, you must find the perfect photo that suits all moods and proclamations.
As if that wasn't pressure enough, you'd better make sure that when you do choose a picture that it is the perfect one because you cannot change it. A change of photo suggests vanity and a deliberate attempt to change one's image that is somehow forgivable on Facebook but not on Twitter. Twitter, you see, is supposed to be above such things, as you'd expect of a medium used to start revolutions (and express opinions on Kate Middleton's dress).
So you need to find the perfect photo, one that expresses wit, solemnity, intelligence, thunderous anger and awe-inspiring insider knowledge; a mash-up, if you will, of Christopher Hitchens, Paul Krugman, Stephen Colbert, David Remnick and Dorothy Parker, but also one that makes you look, you know, young and hot. And if you're finding this stressful, wait until you realise that your devastatingly witty observation about David Cameron's face hasn't been retweeted once. Really, isn't life hard enough?
So we've all seen the wedding dress. Do we still have to care about how Kate Middleton dresses?
Sarah, by email
Oh my stars, yes. Now more than ever! But as with the Twitter, no one quite seems to know why because no one knows what the royal family is for (and, one might add, were one feeling particularly sarcastic, perhaps this in turn suggests that the confusion comes from the fact that the royal family and Twitter alike are not for anything at all. But let's not start the week on the grumpy note we know it will end on).
Even before Cinderella married Prince Charming, one writer hilariously came over all Dowager Countess of Grantham, despite writing for the most downmarket tabloid ever produced and she huffed and puffed like the big bad wolf over Kate's shocking gumption in buying clothes from the – gasp – high street! "Staggeringly normal, mind-bogglingly cheap and disappointingly pedestrian," sniffed the scribe, which is funny because that middle term is just what some of us think of the jibes thrown by this tabloid at la Middleton.
And yet, insanely, Kate, somehow failed to follow this writer's advice and continued to wear high-street clothes even after the wedding, prompting one American fashion blog to headline the photo, "Kate Middleton Steps Out in an $89 Polyester Zara Dress the Day After the Wedding." The story itself was (sort of) positive, the superfluous reference to polyester was not. And so, in order to help the duchess, I have the perfect outfit that she should wear to satisfy one and all of her subjects: a Disney princess costume, which is just how princesses are supposed to dress. They appear to be only £20, true, but only Kate gets to have all of her dreams come true.
Fashion (http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/fashion)
Kate Middleton (http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/kate-middleton)
Twitter (http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/twitter)
Internet (http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/internet)
Blogging (http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/blogging)
Hadley Freeman (http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/hadleyfreeman)
guardian.co.uk (http://www.guardian.co.uk) © Guardian News & Media Limited 2011 | Use of this content is subject to our Terms & Conditions (http://users.guardian.co.uk/help/article/0,,933909,00.html) | More Feeds (http://www.guardian.co.uk/help/feeds)
http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/kmhfMS3QVk1ISlcJ9njvU_-qt1k/0/di (http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/kmhfMS3QVk1ISlcJ9njvU_-qt1k/0/da)
http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/kmhfMS3QVk1ISlcJ9njvU_-qt1k/1/di (http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~at/kmhfMS3QVk1ISlcJ9njvU_-qt1k/1/da)
أكثر... (http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2011/may/08/ask-hadley-middleton-royals-twitter)